Updated November 7, 2023
Armed Drones: Evolution as a Counterterrorism Tool
Armed drones (also commonly called Unmanned Aerial
• Identifying High-Value Targets: conducting ISR to
Vehicles, or UAVs) are unmanned aircraft designed to
identify terrorist leaders or those possessing special
identify, surveil, and engage ground-based targets—ranging
skills deemed to be a significant threat to the United
from materiel to individuals—with kinetic weapons. The
States. Operators can use both armed and unarmed
United States has significantly increased its use of armed
drones for such a mission.
drones to attack global counterterrorism targets since the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11) continuing to
• Executing Signature Strikes: lethally targeting
today to support U.S. and partnering country
unidentified individuals based on behaviors, patterns,
counterterrorism missions. Prior to 9/11, the United States
and locations often associated with terrorist
deployed unarmed drones at various places around the
organizations.
world primarily to support surveillance activities. Congress
plays a continuing role in approving, funding, and
• Targeting Equipment/Facilities: destroying buildings or
overseeing the use of UAVs.
training areas used to house or support terrorist activity.
Evolution of Armed Drone Usage
Figure 1. Armed Predator Drone
With the Curtiss NSC-2, the U.S. military first started using
remote-controlled aircraft in the 1930s—initially for
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR)
missions, and later for deploying torpedoes and land-attack
bombs. The United States first employed drones in a
combat role in the course of the Vietnam War, including the
AQM-34 Firebee. The Firebee initially flew in the 1950s as
an aerial gunnery target drone, and then in the 1960s as an
intelligence-collection drone, and ultimately was modified
to deliver payloads in 2002. In September 2000, the United
States used an ISR drone over Afghanistan to find Osama
Bin Laden as he was being sought for his role in the 1998
terrorist attacks against the U.S. embassies in Kenya and
Tanzania. After the drone proved successful in ISR
operations—and in response to a need for additional lethal

tools after the attacks of 9/11—the U.S. military
Source: U.S. Department of Defense Photos.
increasingly outfitted drones with lethal payloads and
deployed them to a variety of geographic locations where
Possible Advantages of Using Armed Drones
suspected terrorists resided.
Some national security professionals suggest there are
many positive aspects to the use of armed drones instead of
While the specific number of global armed drones being
traditional manned aircraft, including the following:
used for counterterrorism missions is not publicly available,
reporting suggests that the U.S. use of armed drones has
• Safety: unmanned drones reduce the risk that a pilot
increased in the 20 years since they were first employed.
could be killed, injured, or captured should the platform
For example, from 2010 through 2020, the United States
be damaged or destroyed.
undertook over 14,000 drone strikes in Afghanistan,
Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen. Some security observers
• Precision: the ability of unmanned drones to get closer
have suggested that, as the United States has withdrawn
to ground-based targets than traditional aircraft could
troops from many overseas locations and transitioned away
enables greater precision in targeting, thereby reducing
from manned counterterrorism missions, it is likely the use
the risk of unintentional death and injury to
of armed drones will increase.
noncombatants and destruction of civilian property.
Types of Targets: Surveillance or Kinetic Strikes
• Loitering: drones are able to linger and surveil targets
Drones perform a variety of national security missions for
for longer than manned aircraft.
the United States. Specific to how armed drones support
counterterrorism missions, the following are commonly
• Expense: the costs associated with acquiring,
performed functions:
maintaining, and operating unmanned drones are less
than that of manned aircrafts. In addition, the costs and
accompanying employment benefits associated with
https://crsreports.congress.gov

---

Armed Drones: Evolution as a Counterterrorism Tool
training drone pilots are less than those for pilots of
and other entities. As armed drone usage increased, so did
manned aircraft.
the instances where U.S. drones mistakenly targeted and
killed civilians. Some security observers suggest that it was
Possible Disadvantages of Using Armed Drones
due to the increased use of this capability and targeting
Other national security professionals suggest that there
mistakes that President Obama assumed control of the
could be negative aspects to using armed drones instead of
decisionmaking and approval process for targeting
traditional manned aircraft, including the following:
suspected terrorists. Under the Trump Administration, the
use of armed drones increased across many theaters of
• Normalization: Based on the aforementioned positive
operations where suspected terrorists resided with less
aspects of drones and the lower downsides of use—
national-level oversight. President Trump delegated to field
namely, reducing the risk of pilots being killed or
commanders the final authority in deciding whether to
captured—the threshold for deciding to use armed
employ this capability.
drones may lead to less rigorous policy or operational
deliberations when deciding to employ this capability.
Under the Biden Administration, geographic constraints
and final approval authority appear to have changed.
• Collateral Damage: Because drones likely offer greater
Reportedly, the Biden Administration issued rules in
precision in targeting, operators may use them in
October 2022 directing that armed drones be used primarily
situations in which a lethal strike could not—or would
in recognized war zones (i.e., Iraq and Syria), where field
not—be executed with manned aircraft. U.S. operators
commanders will still retain delegated final authority. These
may also use armed drones in counterterrorism
rules reportedly require presidential approval to add
operations where there are no friendly observers on the
suspected terrorists located outside of these two countries to
ground to analyze potential collateral damage. This may
a list whereby they can be targeted for lethal action,
result in increased collateral deaths of the civilian
including a drone strike. Liz Sherwood-Randall, President
population.
Biden’s Homeland Security Advisor and the person who
oversaw the review of the armed drone policy, stated that
• Counter-Productive: Noncombatants in affected
the policy is to ensure that the U.S. government is
countries may see widespread use of this capability
“discerning and agile in protecting Americans against
negatively, if they view it as involving indiscriminate
evolving global terrorist challenges ... [while] minimizing
killings. This dynamic could turn supportive and
civilian casualties.”
sympathetic civilians in the affected area away from
U.S. policies and lead some individuals to be drawn to
Potential Questions Facing Congress
joining terrorist groups or taking other actions counter to
In light of the trend of increasing armed drone strikes
U.S. interests.
against counterterrorism targets, Congress may retain or
amend the 2001 AUMF to expand or restrict the use of
• Mental Health: With many of the drone pilots being
armed drones. Congress may also consider the following
located in the United States when remotely engaging
questions in conducting oversight activities and reviewing
suspected terrorist targets located overseas, the physical
future funding requests for the use of armed drones for
separation from the theater of combat and erroneous
counterterrorism purposes.
killings of civilians has led to concerns associated with
post-traumatic stress disorder.
• How and where are armed drones currently being used
to support counterterrorism missions?
Historical Presidential Approval Process for the
Use of Armed Drones
• How effective has the use of armed drones been in
Since 9/11, the approval process for the use of armed
stopping terrorists from targeting U.S. global security
drones to engage counterterrorism targets overseas has
interests?
evolved with each Administration. The Authorization for
Use of Military Force (AUMF)(P.L. 107-40)—passed soon
• Does the use of armed drones allow for cost savings
after the terrorist attacks on 9/11—gave the President the
compared with other counterterrorism capabilities?
ability to employ a variety of tools to track down, capture,
or kill suspected terrorists. Various Administrations have
• Based on two decades of lessons learned regarding the
interpreted the AUMF to (1) tighten or loosen the
use of armed drones for counterterrorism missions, what
restrictions on the use of armed drones in various parts of
are the advantages and disadvantages of the use of this
the world, and (2) retain within the Office of the President
capability in supporting national security policies and
or delegate approval authority to field commanders for use
goals?
of this capability.
• What is the current approval process for the use of
The George W. Bush Administration—soon after 9/11,
armed drones for the various types of counterterrorism-
when increased funding significantly advanced armed drone
related targets?
technology—focused counterterrorism strikes mostly on the
tribal areas of Pakistan. When the Obama Administration
• Is the U.S. supporting military activities with armed
came into office, the use of armed drones increased
drones in Syria, Ukraine, Israel, and other geographic
throughout the world, targeting suspected terrorists
areas?
associated or affiliated with Al-Qaeda, ISIS, Boko Haram,
https://crsreports.congress.gov

---

Armed Drones: Evolution as a Counterterrorism Tool
•
John W. Rollins, Specialist in Terrorism and National
Security
IF12342


Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF12342 · VERSION 4 · UPDATED

---